Control: severity -1 serious
Control: tag -1 + upstream
Hi Sven,
Sven Joachim wrote:
> The latest upload has dropped libelf-dev from Build-Conflicts which is a
> welcome change. However, there is the problem that screen automagically
> links with -lelf if it is available, and screen-udeb then gains an
> unfulfillable dependency on libelf1:
>
> ,----
> | $ dpkg-deb -f screen-udeb_4.6.2-2_i386.udeb Depends
> | libc6-udeb (>= 2.27), libelf1 (>= 0.132), libtinfo6-udeb (>= 6.1)
> `----
Meh, I didn't notice that change. Thanks for the bug report
> Upstream has stopped linking with libelf in commit d641761d83[1],
Ah, good. Thanks for checking that, too! Unfortunately git.sv.gnu.org
as well as savannah.gnu.org seems unreachable at the moment, but the
commit was already in my (slightly outdated) local cache of upstream's
git repo.
> I suggest doing the same in the Debian package.
Yes.
> According to dpkg-shlibdeps, screen does not use any symbols from
> libelf.
Probably the reason for that commit.
Point is, that commit you referenced was in the master branch. But I
found the same commit (d340b02c) in the screen-v4 branch, too, and it
should be included in Debian since upstream release 4.3.0.
Which raises the question why that effect is still visible. If I look
at the current upstream configure.ac it's in again there.
git blame shows that it came in again with the renaming of
configure.in to configure.ac in 2015 with commit a8dc1fb5. Meh. Will
report to upstream.
Thanks again for making me aware of that issue!
Marking as serious as an uninstallable udeb is RC from my point of
view.
Regards, Axel
--
,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/
: :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin
`. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5
`- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE
